ONE key point that came through when the Government unveiled proposals to revamp the land transport system in January was this: The views of the people affected must count.

The Land Transport Authority (LTA) then set up a Community Partnership Division to canvass views from the grassroots, right down to constituency level. An outreach programme will also bring grassroots leaders together to discuss transport policies.

This commitment to get Singaporeans involved was made as wide-ranging changes to the bus and rail systems were announced. No doubt, it should apply to taxis too.

Yet, less than two months later, a row broke out over an LTA rule that, in the Central Business District (CBD), cabbies can pick up and drop off passengers at taxi stands only.

Two weeks later, on March 17, the rule was amended. It is now okay to pick up and drop off passengers at side roads not served by public buses, the LTA said.

Some hailed the change as a demonstration of its flexible approach and openness to feedback. Others wondered why it did not see what was coming.

It seemed a no-brainer: The rule would naturally lead to complaints about having to find a taxi stand, get in a queue and wait for a taxi. Passengers would not be able to get off at exactly where they wanted to, and what if it rained?

This begs the question: How much consultation took place before the rule was introduced?

A check with commuters and businesses in the area, transport companies and taxi associations led to this conclusion: Not much.

Those living and working in the CBD said they found out about the rule through the newspapers, or when they tried to look for a cab.

Mr Jonas Ericsson, the managing director of lifestyle store Style:Nordic in Ann Siang Road, said he was surprised when his assistant had to walk in the rain from South Bridge Road with heavy bags in tow because the taxi driver refused to let him alight at the store.

'We don't have a car and we're dependent on taxis to get around. We couldn't do our work properly at all,' he said.

'Sometimes, people who make these decisions don't understand the impact they can have on small businesses like ours.'

Chinatown resident Nicholas Ng said the authorities should have talked to residents in the area about the rule before going ahead with it.

'We are on the outskirts of the CBD. It's not fair to impose the rule on our estate when we live in a residential area away from the main roads.'

Taxi companies, meanwhile, say they were notified of the change late last year, around the same time that the rule was made public in the media.

Six associations which look after the interests of the cabbies say they were briefed on the rule on Feb 21, eight days before the March 1 implementation date.

Member of Parliament Seng Han Thong, adviser to the associations, said in an e-mail that the heads of the associations 'raised their concerns on insufficient taxi stands in the CBD, difficulties in locating the taxi stands, lack of shelter for some taxi stands/stops and the likely impact of the ruling on the elderly, disabled and tourists''.

'In addition, they proposed to LTA to allow boarding and alighting at side roads.'

The LTA said that based on feedback, it took into account two points before March 1: to build more taxi stands; and to shorten the operation hours of the rule, from 6.30am to midnight, to 7am to 10pm.

Yet, came March 1, confusion reigned and tempers grew short.

Commuters, many of whom heard about the rule for the first time, moaned that they were not getting the point-to- point service they were paying for, or that they had to walk 300m in the rain - this March has been one of the wettest on record - to get a cab.

Cabbies, who had to listen to the moans, were unhappy about having to explain themselves.

After a few days, some people who would have ordinarily taken a taxi to the CBD decided to drive instead, adding to the congestion.

Should feedback have been gathered from commuters in the CBD? Should businesses, whose takings were affected, have had a say?

MP Lily Neo (Jalan Besar GRC), whose Chinatown residents were affected by the rule, gave credit to the LTA for tweaking it and responding promptly to feedback.

Likewise, Dr Amy Khor, the chairman of government feedback unit Reach, said: 'Policy-making almost always involves a certain degree of judgment even after consultation is carried out and feedback is considered. Policies may also need recalibration after their implementation.'

But MP Ong Kian Min, the deputy chairman of the Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport, thinks the consultation process could have been wider.

'It's good to get it right from the start, rather than introducing the rule, getting everyone upset and then tweaking it later,' he said.

'More people should have been consulted, like the commuters, the man in the street, and not just taxi associations.'

Worse, few people affected knew exactly why a practice that had been going on for so long was suddenly outlawed.

This was a point touched on by Assistant Professor Paul Barter, an urban transport analyst at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, who said the LTA could have better explained the rationale for the new rule.

When announcing it, the LTA said simply that it was for safety reasons: Taxis straying into bus lanes or making sudden stops to pick up passengers pose a danger to others and impede smooth traffic flow.

But Dr Barter noted that the LTA did not trot out statistics and such to show why the change was needed.

Indeed, when contacted by The Sunday Times for this commentary, the LTA gave some eye-popping statistics that would certainly have helped bolster its case for a rule change: One in three accidents in the CBD involves a taxi. Island-wide, the rate is one in five.

And in 70 per cent of accidents involving a taxi in the CBD, the taxi is at fault, it added.

There's more: Out of every 10,000 registered taxis here, 53 got involved in an accident in the CBD, compared to 4.6 per 10,000 registered vehicles.

These statistics are average values derived from data collected from 2005 to 2007, said the LTA.

Clearly, the rule was crafted with good intentions, but it is no stretch to say more could have been done to seek feedback from those affected before it was imposed.

Instead, it now seems that the move was an attempt to change the culture of commuting in a city by fiat - especially considering the fact that no other major city in the world, except Paris, bars hailing a taxi from the side of the road.

The upcoming overhaul of Singapore's land transport system promises to put the commuter at the centre of planning. This time, a much larger group of people - bus and train commuters - will be affected.

Hopefully, the feedback gathering for other changes will be more rigorous, and will lead to policy changes if necessary.

Only then can Singapore claim to have the commuter-centric transport system it is working towards - one that, as Transport Minister Raymond Lim put it, has its fingers firmly on the pulse of the people.

ghimlay@sph.com.sg